Searchhttp://thebulletin.org/search/article-keywords/compensation?search_api_views_fulltext=&field_publication_date_start&field_publication_date_end&sort_by=field_publication_date
enThe legalities of leaving nuclearhttp://thebulletin.org/2013/january/legalities-leaving-nuclear
The current political consensus favors continued reliance on civilian nuclear power in France, but a reduction in that reliance was discussed during the 2012 presidential election, and debate on that score continues. If the political consensus ever shifts toward a nuclear phase-out, the French government has several options through which it can reduce or abandon civilian nuclear power generation. The parliament can pass a law to discontinue nuclear power. The people can do the same, through referendum. Or the executive branch of government can simply not authorize the construction of new nuclear plants. If the parliament, the executive branch, or citizens acted to eliminate nuclear power, EDF, the operator of France’s 58 nuclear power plants, could seek compensation for lost revenue. The legal considerations involved in such an effort vary, depending on whether the nuclear shutdown were enacted into law or instituted through executive-branch regulation. Currently, it is unclear what chances of success a compensation claim might have. Over time, though, France will retire at least part of its aging fleet of nuclear reactors. The executive branch and parliament should pay careful attention to the structure of laws and regulations related to nuclear shutdowns, to reduce the likelihood that successful legal action will ensue.
2013-01-01 00:00:00<a href="/bio/alexandre-faro">Alexandre Faro</a>http://thebulletin.org/2013/january/legalities-leaving-nuclearThe legalities of a nuclear shutdownhttp://thebulletin.org/2012/november/legalities-nuclear-shutdown
In July 2002, Germany amended its Atomic Energy Act so no new nuclear power plants could be built and existing power plants would continue running only for a limited time. In 2009, however, a coalition led by Chancellor Angela Merkel took control of the German government and reversed the country’s nuclear phase-out policy, extending nuclear plant operating lives and announcing that risks associated with nuclear energy were insignificant. Three months later, just days after the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station in Japan, the German government abruptly reversed course again, closing eight older nuclear power plants and eventually ordering the nine remaining plants to cease operations by 2022, at the latest. Three out of the four operators of German nuclear power plants have since taken legal action, seeking compensation for profits supposedly lost as a result of the nuclear policy change. But due to a number of factors—including the German constitution, which places a duty on the government to protect citizens, and the nuclear operators’ participation in the original 2002 agreement to phase out nuclear power—most legal observers believe these legal challenges to Germany’s nuclear exit are destined to fail. The German nuclear exit includes financial compromises that allow nuclear operators to recoup investments in their nuclear power plants, and the legal protection these compromises provide to the government may be the part of the German initiative that is of most interest to other countries considering nuclear exits.
2012-11-01 00:00:00<a href="/bio/alexander-rossnagel">Alexander Rossnagel</a>, <a href="/bio/anja-hentschel">Anja Hentschel</a>http://thebulletin.org/2012/november/legalities-nuclear-shutdownUnderestimating effects: Why causation probabilities need to be replaced in regulation, policy, and the lawhttp://thebulletin.org/2012/may/underestimating-effects-why-causation-probabilities-need-be-replaced-regulation-policy-and
Causation probabilities are often a component of decisions on awarding compensation for radiation exposure and descriptions of the number of cancers caused by radiation releases. In many instances, the use of epidemiologic data to calculate such probabilities may seriously underestimate the number of people harmed and the percentage of cancers induced or accelerated by the radiation exposure. Epidemiologic studies can more reliably underpin systems that award compensation using years of healthy life lost due to the exposure. Such a system has its own imprecisions but is more scientifically supportable than using causation probabilities to award compensation.
2012-05-01 00:00:00<a href="/bio/sander-greenland">Sander Greenland</a>http://thebulletin.org/2012/may/underestimating-effects-why-causation-probabilities-need-be-replaced-regulation-policy-and